These were apparently a meme about state being hard to manage rather
than a statement about the code itself. I spent a while trying to find
some complex logic this comment was alluding to that would indicate why
it's "a nightmare to manage".
Many LED strips use different color order (GRB in particular is common).
This makes the change at the HAL level. This solves 2 problems; first, no code needs to change in the high level drivers, which was challenging for C++, and second, simulation will behave properly as no conversion is needed. The HAL will accept an array of data objects in the same order no matter what the selected output order is, and will convert before sending it to the FPGA for output.
To accomplish this, NEON bulk load/interleave instructions are utilized. The low level implementation (load, store, and alignment functions) come from the Simd Library. The high level implementations are inspired by the image conversion functions in the simd library, but have diverged significantly.
Much of the implementation uses templates and inlined functions rather than runtime parameters; This is a trade off between the size of the generated code and the amount of function calls done at runtime. Currently, the entire conversion operation is inlined.
Was causing bugs when combined with patterns that need to read back from the buffer (eg masks and overlays)
Co-authored-by: Joseph Eng <s-engjo@bsd405.org>
This refactors Alert in both c++ and java to fix the issues with the current c++ implementation and improve performance.
Currently, constructing an Alert adds it to a list of Alerts with the same group and type. Activating an alert sets a flag on the alert. When the SendableAlerts is polled (GetStrings), the entire list is iterated over, filtered, and the filtered list is sorted by timestamp. This leads to a worst case O(m + nlog(n)) time complexity for GetStrings, where m and n are the count of total constructed alerts active alerts respectively. It also allocates intermediate data structures to hold the active alert strings for sorting.
This changes the implementation to improve the performance of GetStrings, by shifting the sorting overhead to Alert.Set
Constructing the Alert only initializes the alert's initial state, and initializes the SendableAlerts for the group if it is not already initialized.
Activating or deactivating an alert sets an internal flag for state tracking, and inserts or removes a structure containing the timestamp and text into a self-sorting data structure (std::set, TreeSet) containing other active alerts with the same group and type. (worst case O(log(n))
Now, SendableAlerts.GetStrings only has to iterate over the structure and copy the strings to the returned array. (amortized O(n))
This also fixes the c++ implementation by removing the need for SendableAlerts to directly access the Alert.
This also adds a helper method to SendableRegistry to force initialization of the instance to prevent static initialization ordering issues.
As string_view operations on std::map<std::string> won't be integrated
until C++26, placeholder implementations are used which are less efficient
in a couple of situations (e.g. insert with hint).
Adds a close function pointer template parameter to hal::Handle. This allows default destructors in many places.
The status parameter has been removed from close functions; in most places it was not used. Where it was, an error is printed instead.
Fixes error when >3 are constructed- in java, m_filterAllocated[index] would be evaluated before the bounds check and throw IndexOutOfBounds, in c++ a vague assertion error would be thrown.
Makes DoAdd static in c++
Makes the error message when HAL_SetFilterSelect fails consistent with java
